Feed aggregator

Prime Video's Carrie has quickly shot to the number one spot on the streaming service, as it leads this week's streaming recommendations. The anticipated adaptation of Stephen King's novel is finally here, and there's a lot to unpack.

Series creator Mike Flanagan has impressed horror fans over the years, especially with his Netflix shows including The Haunting of Hill House and Midnight Mass. His new version of Carrie marks his sixth adaptation of King's works, following movies including Gerald's Game and Doctor Sleep.

With that in mind, we've all been interested to see how Flanagan handled Carrie, King's first story. I can confidently say I enjoyed the series, but there are some differences from it here that will cause division.

The eight-episode season follows Carrie White (Summer H. Howell) after her father dies in a tragic accident, prompting authorities to send her to a public school for the first time whilst her mother Margaret (Samantha Sloyan), re-enters the workforce.

Attending a new school is daunting for anyone, but Carrie knows very little of the outside world, after being raised by overbearing religious parents and schooled at home. Her struggle to adjust among other teens is the catalyst for her story, after she is baffled by everyday things such as a school shooting drill and getting her first period, both of which scare her to the point she fears as though she is about to die.

Carrie, in my opinion, is one of Stephen King's most likable protagonists. Howell portrays her brilliantly, focusing on her compassion for others and her desperate need to fit in, trying to relate to her fellow students even though she has never used a computer, nor does she have a cellphone. In the eyes of the school she is "weird", and the perfect target for bullying.

Flanagan's decision to set the story in a modern world resonated with me, and I liked this change. With technology being both wonderful and anxiety-inducing, he uses things like social media, camera phones and the internet at large to torment Carrie even more than she was in the book.

Chris Hargensen and Sue Snell contribute to Carrie's downfall (Image credit: Prime Video)

The school bullies are an important part of Carrie, and the casting works well here too. Alison Thornton's performance as Chris Hargensen, the ringleader of the bullies, is great and she makes some horrifying decisions throughout the series. But instead of turning her into a cartoonish villain, Flanagan also focuses on Chris' own issues, and the collapse of her family life at home.

Additionally, Siena Agudong's Sue Snell is shown as a complex character here, who does begin to feel remorse for Carrie's ongoing torment, whereas the group around her doesn't. I really liked Sue in this and she's one of my favorite characters as a result.

Characters in the Carrie series felt well-rounded to me, and for the most part, I was happy with the changes and the nuance. But there's one character who I was disappointed in, and that was Margaret White, who is portrayed a lot more sympathetically in the series.

In my opinion, I think Margaret should have been crueler. We do see her intense and suffocating religious beliefs, but she is more empathetic towards Carrie, and I wasn't a fan of the way her character was softened here. Margaret's resentment of Carrie in the book and the Brian De Palma film contributed to Carrie's eventual breakdown and use of her power for destruction, something I think is important.

In the original story, Carrie never found any comfort at home, but some decisions in the series felt out of character for Margaret. By supporting her daughter, I felt like it took away from the crippling isolation she is supposed to experience, resulting in the iconic, violent prom scene.

The ending is also different, which I have noted some fans may not be impressed with. I didn't mind the ending as much, but I still would have preferred if Margaret's characterization had been more faithful to the source material.

That's my only major gripe with the series, though, and I do think Mike Flanagan's Carrie is a good retelling of the story for the modern era, particularly when it comes to her fellow students and a school faculty that ultimately fails her.

So if you're keen to see a different take on Carrie, you might enjoy the Prime Video series. We've known for a while that it wasn't trying to copy the book directly, and it's certainly the most unique adaptation we've had.

The Xteink S4 might be the tiny ereader you’ve been waiting for, as unlike other Xteink devices — and rival products like the Boox Picco — this runs Android.

That comes with various upsides, not least the ability to directly access the Kindle and Kobo apps, the absence of which is something I’ve been lamenting about my Xteink X4 Pro, but it also has some downsides.

So should you wait for this currently China-only ereader to get a global release? Or are you better off sticking with the Xteink X4 Classic, the X4 Pro or the even tinier X3? I’ve compared these devices below, to help answer that question.

Xteink S4 vs X4 Pro vs X4 Classic vs X3: specs comparison

Below you’ll find a closer look at the key features of every available Xteink model, but first here’s how their core specs compare:

Xteink S4

Xteink X4 Pro

Xteink X4 Classic

Xteink X3

Dimensions:

6.98mm thick

111 x 69 x 5.95mm

114 x 69 x 4.9mm

97.6 x 63.7 x 5.1mm

Weight:

94g

72g

68g

58g

Display:

4.3-inch, 219ppi

4.3-inch, 219ppi

4.3-inch, 219ppi

3.7-inch, 259ppi

Touchscreen:

Yes

Yes

No

No

Front light:

Yes

Yes

No

No

Storage:

32GB built in

microSD - 16GB included

microSD - 16GB included

microSD - 16GB included

Battery:

1,400mAh

1,100mAh

920mAh

650mAh

Charging:

USB-C

Proprietary

Proprietary

Proprietary

Operating system:

Android 11

Proprietary

Proprietary

Proprietary

Magnets:

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Xteink S4 vs X4 Pro vs X4 Classic vs X3: price and availability

The Xteink S4 (Image credit: Xteink)

The Xteink X4 Classic, X4 Pro, and X3 are all available directly from Xteink and from some third-party stores like Amazon. They ship to much of the world, and the cheapest is the Xteink X3, which costs $69 / £69 / AU$102.

Then there’s the Xteink X4 Classic for $79 / £79 / AU$116, while the Xteink X4 Pro will cost you $99 / £99 / AU$146.

The Xteink S4 is so far only available in China, but I’d expect it will cost at least as much as the X4 Pro, if not more.

Pricing

Model

US price

UK price

AU price

Xteink X3

$69

£69

AU$102

Xteink X4 Classic

$79

£79

AU$116

Xteink X4 Pro

$99

£99

AU$146

Xteink S4

TBC

TBC

TBC

Xteink S4 vs X4 Pro vs X4 Classic vs X3: design

The Xteink X3 (Image credit: Xteink)

All of these devices look similar to each other, as they’re all small rectangles and look a bit like a tiny phone — albeit with larger bezels than most modern smartphones.

They all have buttons and charging ports on the sides, but the Xteink X3 and Xteink X4 Classic each also have two long, narrow buttons on the bezel below the display, while the Xteink X4 Pro and Xteink S4 instead have a single circular button, like a much smaller version of the home button on very old iPhones.

The Xteink X4 Classic and X3 are both available in a choice of Space Black or Mist Gray (the latter of which is sometimes referred to as ‘Frost White’ instead), while the X4 Pro is currently only sold in Space Black, but pictures of it exist in a gray shade too, so that will probably launch sooner or later. In China, the Xteink S4 is available in black and white shades, and it’s likely the color options will be the same when it goes global.

So there’s not much difference there either — the main design difference is in their weight and dimensions. The Xteink X3 is the smallest and lightest of the bunch at 97.6 x 63.7 x 5.1mm and 58g. Then there’s the Xteink X4 Classic at 114 x 69 x 4.9mm and 68g — making it slightly slimmer but otherwise larger.

The Xteink X4 Pro is 111 x 69 x 5.95mm and 72g, so it’s not quite as tall as the X4 Classic but is thicker and heavier than both that and the X3. And then there’s the Xteink S4, which we don’t have full dimensions for yet, but which we know is 6.98mm thick and 95g, making it the thickest and heaviest of them all.

All of these devices have built in magnets though, allowing you to attach them to the back of a phone — though they’re quite vulnerable like that, so you might prefer to put them in a case anyway.

Xteink S4 vs X4 Pro vs X4 Classic vs X3: display

The Xteink X4 Classic (Image credit: Xteink)

The Xteink S4, X4 Classic, and X4 Pro all have a 4.3-inch screen with 219 pixels per inch, while the Xteink X3 has a smaller 3.7-inch screen with 259 pixels per inch.

So you’re getting a slightly crisper display on the X3, which could make all the difference as personally my X4 Pro isn’t quite as sharp as I’d like — especially when you compare it side-by-side with other devices like the ViWoods AiPaper Reader with its 300ppi display.

On the other hand, you’re also getting a truly tiny screen if you choose the X3, which could be a good or bad thing depending on your preference — it makes this all the more compact, but also means you’ll constantly be turning the page.

Beyond those differences, the Xteink S4 and Xteink X4 Pro have touchscreens — though you can also turn pages with buttons if you prefer — whereas the X3 and X4 Classic are purely reliant on buttons for interactions.

The Xteink S4 and X4 Pro also both have a front light, which the other models lack, meaning these are the only two you can read on without external light sources.

Xteink S4 vs X4 Pro vs X4 Classic vs X3: performance and software

The Xteink X4 Pro (Image credit: TechRadar)

The Xteink X4 Classic, X4 Pro, and X3 all run a proprietary Linux-based operating system. It’s an operating system that personally I didn’t think much of, and I’m not alone judging by forum comments. But Xteink’s devices can handily be bought with unlocked firmware, making it easy to flash alternative operating systems onto them.

I’m running an open source one called CrossInk, which I’m quite pleased with. But there’s a major limitation with any of the options in that they can’t run the Kindle or Kobo apps (or any other apps), making it harder to get books onto them than with most ereaders — you need to download DRM-free versions or remove the DRM, and then transfer them to the device.

That’s a real pain, and it’s a problem the Xteink S4 solves, as this runs Android 11. And while I can’t yet confirm exactly which apps work with it (since there are sometimes compatibility issues on ereaders), Xteink claims it supports “mainstream reader apps.”

Still, there are two potential problems with this approach as well — one is battery life, which I’ll get into in the next section, and the other is security and support. Android 11 is six years old now, and it could be increasingly vulnerable to bugs and malware, since Google is focused on patching newer releases. Besides which, Android ereaders tend not to receive Android updates anyway, so it may not receive security patches or new Android versions.

Eventually, apps will also stop supporting Android 11, so while Android is likely to give you a slicker experience, having such an old version comes with major drawbacks.

As for storage, the Xteink X4 Pro, X4 Classic, and X3 are all purely reliant on a microSD card — they each come with a 16GB one included, but it’s a low quality one, so you might want to replace it. There’s support for cards of up to 256GB.

The Xteink S4 takes a different approach, with 32GB of built in storage, but Android probably takes up a sizable chunk of that, and there’s seemingly no microSD card slot.

You’re also limited to very few book formats on the Xteink X3, X4 Classic, and X4 Pro, with just EPUB and TXT being supported, alongside JPG and BMP for images (or seemingly just BMP in the case of the Classic). We don’t have a full list of supported formats for the Xteink S4, but the company claims it supports “10+ native formats," so it should have the edge there.

Xteink S4 vs X4 Pro vs X4 Classic vs X3: battery

The Xteink X4 Classic (Image credit: Xteink)

The Xteink S4 has a 1,400mAh battery, and while we don’t know exactly how long it lasts, Xteink claims its “generous battery keeps sessions long.”

That’s higher capacity than the other models, with the Xteink 4 Pro having an 1,100mAh battery, the X4 Classic having a 920mAh one, and the X3 having just a 650mAh one.

Xteink only appears to have released battery stats for the X3, which it claims can last up to 10-14 days, based on 1-3 hours of reading per day. It’s likely then that even with their larger screens, the Xteink X4 Classic and X4 Pro will last even longer, given their far higher capacity batteries, and that certainly seems to be the case in my experience of the X4 Pro.

Granted, I’m not running stock firmware, which could affect things, but I seem to be getting months off a single charge, albeit with perhaps more like just 30 minutes of reading a day.

You might assume then that the Xteink S4 will last even longer — and perhaps it will — but I’d be surprised, as Android tends to be far more battery hungry than the lightweight operating systems used by the other models. I suspect, based on my experience with the Android-powered ViWoods AiPaper Reader, that the S4 might actually have the worst life of the bunch, but that remains to be seen.

So that’s the other downside of it running Android, but it does have one advantage on the battery front too, as it has a USB-C port, which makes charging convenient. The other models all use an annoying proprietary charger.

Xteink S4 vs X4 Pro vs X4 Classic vs X3: verdict

The Xteink X4 Pro (Image credit: Xteink)

There’s no clear winner between these devices. If you simply want the smallest and lightest ereader possible, then you should go for the Xteink X3 — especially as that’s also the cheapest.

If you want something a bit bigger — or you think you’d benefit from a touchscreen or a front light — then consider the Xteink X4 Pro. For all of that plus Android, the only option is the as-yet-unreleased Xteink S4 — though that also comes with downsides when it comes to security and potentially battery life.

The only one that’s harder to make a case for is the Xteink X4 Classic. This slots between the X3 and the X4 Pro with a bigger screen than the X3 but no touchscreen or light. Those features I feel are important enough that if you want a bigger screen you should choose the Pro over the Classic unless money is really tight.

Personally, I’m happy with my Xteink X4 Pro, and wouldn’t choose any of the other models over it. Other than the S4 it’s the most full-featured, but the compromises that come with the Xteink S4’s Android version make it unappealing to me. What I really want is a model running Android 17, but even then, if that meant significantly worse battery life I might think twice.

The only things I’m certain I want that the X4 Pro lacks are a sharper screen and USB-C, so hopefully a device that ticks all those boxes is in the works.

Prime Video's Carrie has quickly shot to the number one spot on the streaming service, as it leads this week's streaming recommendations. The anticipated adaptation of Stephen King's novel is finally here, and there's a lot to unpack.

Series creator Mike Flanagan has impressed horror fans over the years, especially with his Netflix shows including The Haunting of Hill House and Midnight Mass. His new version of Carrie marks his sixth adaptation of King's works, following movies including Gerald's Game and Doctor Sleep.

With that in mind, we've all been interested to see how Flanagan handled Carrie, King's first story. I can confidently say I enjoyed the series, but there are some differences from it here that will cause division.

The eight-episode season follows Carrie White (Summer H. Howell) after her father dies in a tragic accident, prompting authorities to send her to a public school for the first time whilst her mother Margaret (Samantha Sloyan), re-enters the workforce.

Attending a new school is daunting for anyone, but Carrie knows very little of the outside world, after being raised by overbearing religious parents and schooled at home. Her struggle to adjust among other teens is the catalyst for her story, after she is baffled by everyday things such as a school shooting drill and getting her first period, both of which scare her to the point she fears as though she is about to die.

Carrie, in my opinion, is one of Stephen King's most likable protagonists. Howell portrays her brilliantly, focusing on her compassion for others and her desperate need to fit in, trying to relate to her fellow students even though she has never used a computer, nor does she have a cellphone. In the eyes of the school she is "weird", and the perfect target for bullying.

Flanagan's decision to set the story in a modern world resonated with me, and I liked this change. With technology being both wonderful and anxiety-inducing, he uses things like social media, camera phones and the internet at large to torment Carrie even more than she was in the book.

Chris Hargensen and Sue Snell contribute to Carrie's downfall (Image credit: Prime Video)

The school bullies are an important part of Carrie, and the casting works well here too. Alison Thornton's performance as Chris Hargensen, the ringleader of the bullies, is great and she makes some horrifying decisions throughout the series. But instead of turning her into a cartoonish villain, Flanagan also focuses on Chris' own issues, and the collapse of her family life at home.

Additionally, Siena Agudong's Sue Snell is shown as a complex character here, who does begin to feel remorse for Carrie's ongoing torment, whereas the group around her doesn't. I really liked Sue in this and she's one of my favorite characters as a result.

Characters in the Carrie series felt well-rounded to me, and for the most part, I was happy with the changes and the nuance. But there's one character who I was disappointed in, and that was Margaret White, who is portrayed a lot more sympathetically in the series.

In my opinion, I think Margaret should have been crueler. We do see her intense and suffocating religious beliefs, but she is more empathetic towards Carrie, and I wasn't a fan of the way her character was softened here. Margaret's resentment of Carrie in the book and the Brian De Palma film contributed to Carrie's eventual breakdown and use of her power for destruction, something I think is important.

In the original story, Carrie never found any comfort at home, but some decisions in the series felt out of character for Margaret. By supporting her daughter, I felt like it took away from the crippling isolation she is supposed to experience, resulting in the iconic, violent prom scene.

The ending is also different, which I have noted some fans may not be impressed with. I didn't mind the ending as much, but I still would have preferred if Margaret's characterization had been more faithful to the source material.

That's my only major gripe with the series, though, and I do think Mike Flanagan's Carrie is a good retelling of the story for the modern era, particularly when it comes to her fellow students and a school faculty that ultimately fails her.

So if you're keen to see a different take on Carrie, you might enjoy the Prime Video series. We've known for a while that it wasn't trying to copy the book directly, and it's certainly the most unique adaptation we've had.

• Man Utd vs Tottenham: Saturday, October 10 at 5.30pm BST / 12.30pm ET / 4.30am AEDT (Sun.)
• Streams: Sky Sports (UK), Peacock (US)
• Outside the UK? Use NordVPN to unblock your streaming account

Watch Man Utd vs Tottenham in the Premier League 2026/27 season, as two struggling sides look to pick up a much-needed win as the English club game resumes after the three-week international break.

Man Utd have won only one of their first five league games, despite facing two promoted teams and two sides who finished in the bottom half of the Premier League last term. The Red Devils are also out of the Carabao Cup, meaning Michael Carrick is already coming under pressure after getting the manager's gig permanently in the summer. Patrick Dorgu and Benjamin Sesko have returned from international duty injury, but Carlos Baleba may be fit to make his United debut, most likely from the bench.

Tottenham's record is even worse, with no wins and just two points from their first five outings to sit bottom of the pile after back-to-back 17th-place finishes. Roberto De Zerbi was heavily backed in the summer transfer market, yet Sandro Tonali, Savio, Mateus Fernandes and Jan Paul van Hecke have struggled to make much impact, while the latter has returned injured from Netherlands duty. De Zerbi has bemoaned a lack of conditioning for his side's travails — can three weeks drilling them have helped?

A win here, the uglier the better, for either side would lift the respective moods considerably.

Here's how to watch Man Utd vs Tottenham in the 2026/27 Premier League from anywhere in the world.

Man Utd vs Tottenham team news

Man Utd XI: Lammens; Yoro, Maguire, Martinez, Shaw; Tielemans, Mainoo; Amad, Fernandes, Cunha; Mbeumo.

Tottenham XI: Kinksy; Gray, Senesi, Van Hecke, Udogie; Gallagher, Tonali, Bergvall; Savio, Solanke, Kudus.

How to watch Man Utd vs Tottenham for FREE

Free Man Utd vs Tottenham streams are scarce but there are a couple of options.

In the US, the Premier League 2026/27 fixture will be on NBC, which is available free to anyone with a TV antenna or cable.

Matches shown on NBC can be accessed via OTT streaming services such as YouTube TV, Fubo, Hulu + Live TV and DirecTV Stream, which all have free trials of varying lengths.

Not in the US? You need a VPN to unlock your FREE stream — find out more below.

How to watch Man Utd vs Tottenham from anywhere

A VPN is handy piece of software that can make your device appear as if it's back in your home country, so you can unlock your usual service. The best VPN right now? We recommend NordVPN – it does everything and you can get our exclusive deal too...

NordVPN deal: Get 3 months extra FREE

Boasting lightning fast speeds, great features, streaming power, and class-leading security, NordVPN is our #1 VPN.

✅ 30-day money-back guarantee
✅ Up to 75% off usual price
✅ Includes 3 extra months for free

Use Nord to unblock your usual streaming service and watch the Man Utd vs Tottenham live stream with our exclusive deal.View Deal

How to watch Man Utd vs Tottenham live streams in the USA

Soccer fans in the US can watch Man Utd vs Tottenham in the Premier League on NBC. You can watch for free with TV antenna or cable, or stream via NBC.com by inputting your provider details.

Streaming service Peacock also provides access to live NBC content. You'll need a Peacock Premium Plus subscription, plans start from $19.99 a month, or $199.99 a year.

NBC content is also available via YouTube TV, Fubo, Hulu + Live TV and DirecTV Stream, which all have free trials of varying lengths.

Outside of the US? Use a VPN whilst you're traveling away from home to unlock your stream. We like NordVPN best.

How to watch a Man Utd vs Tottenham live stream in the UK

(Image credit: Future)

Sky Sports is broadcasting Man Utd vs Tottenham in the UK on its Premier League and Main Event channels.

Packages cost £35 per month for new customers, or £22 per month if you already have a Sky TV contract. The Sky Go app lets you watch on your laptop, mobile or tablet.

Fans can also tune in using a NOW Sports Membership, with 24-hour passes costing £14.99.

Not in the UK for Man Utd vs Tottenham? Use NordVPN to access your usual Premier League streams.

How to watch Man Utd vs Tottenham live streams in Canada

Fubo is the Premier League's broadcast partner in Canada and it has live coverage of Man Utd vs Tottenham.

Prices start from CA$31.49 per month for Fubo's Sports Monthly package. However, the best option right now is the Quarterly Package which costs just CA$27.99 CA$14.99 for each of the first three months. You can also watch Fubo's content if you have a select DAZN subscription in Canada.

Not in Canada? Use NordVPN if you're away from home, in order to tap into your preferred coverage from anywhere.

How to watch Man Utd vs Tottenham live streams in Australia

(Image credit: free)

A Man Utd vs Tottenham live stream is available in Australia on Stan Sport.

You can pick up a Stan Sport subscription for as little as AU$29.99 per month for the basic plan containing adds. That price consists of the AU$9.99 Stan subscription fee plus the Sport add-on for AU$20.

Outside of Oz? You can use a VPN to access your usual Premier League coverage. We recommend NordVPN.

What is the Man Utd vs Tottenham start time?

Man Utd vs Tottenham kicks off at 5.30pm BST / 12.30pm ET / 9.30am PT on Saturday, 10 October.

If you are in Australia, the game will be broadcast at 4.30am AEDT on Sunday, 11 October.

What is the Man Utd vs Tottenham head-to-head?

Of the previous 207 meetings between the sides, Man Utd have won 97 to Tottenham's 58, with 52 draws.

Man Utd had the upper hand last season, drawing 2-2 away from home and beating Tottenham 2-0 at Old Trafford.

We test and review VPN services in the context of legal recreational uses. For example:1. Accessing a service from another country (subject to the terms and conditions of that service).2. Protecting your online security and strengthening your online privacy when abroad.We do not support or condone the illegal or malicious use of VPN services. Consuming pirated content that is paid-for is neither endorsed nor approved by Future Publishing.

Artificial Intelligence (AI) is great at generating valuable insights, but what companies end up doing with those insights - that’s where true achievement lies, and that’s what companies should be focusing on.

This is one of the core messages delivered by Ryan Waite, Director of Open Source Ecosystems and Incubations at Microsoft, during his keynote, “From Open Source to Agentic Systems: Building the AI Native Era” at the Open Source Summit.

Waite described the interaction between AI and human expertise as a learning loop, a kind of hill-climbing machine that helps businesses improve, and keep on improving.

The knowledge belongs to the business

AI models are great at processing enormous amounts of information and generating insights at a scale humans cannot match (and sometimes cannot even fathom), but people bring something arguably more important to the table: context and judgement.

Putting insights into wider context, and using that to make conclusions, helps employees turn information into knowledge, and that knowledge later becomes part of the organization’s collective expertise. And with every iteration the knowledge grows, helping businesses climb further up the proverbial mountain.

Sovereignty and ownership seem to be an underlying theme to most of the keynotes here at the Open Source Summit, and Waite’s presentation is no different. As AI generates insight, and humans turn that insight to knowledge, it now becomes vital to secure that knowledge and make sure it remains under the organization’s control.

“It's based on your data,” he said. “It's based on your people. It shouldn't be given off to an AI model, that's separate. And that's why we believe that for organizations to build their own hill-climbing machines, to build their own learning groups, they need to build control with the sort of learning loops and not be beholden to a single AI provider.”

After all, everything AI generates is based (or at least, should be) on proprietary business information, and the decisions made based on those insights depend on employees and their understanding of the company. So, businesses need to make sure ownership of the knowledge accumulated through these interactions are not handed over to an external AI provider - a challenge that will probably grow bigger and bigger as businesses become more dependent on AI tools.

The knowledge generated through these tools could become tied to a particular model, or provider. What happens when businesses want to adopt better technologies as they emerge? To future-proof these processes, Waite argues businesses should build their own learning loops and maintain control over the information, processes, and technologies that make them work.

Choosing the right AI model

One way to do that is to make sure you’re not tied to a single AI model. Many businesses, Waite says, begin their AI journey with proprietary frontier models, especially when tackling problems they don’t fully understand themselves. However, as they become better and understand their tasks more, they might not need expensive frontier models any more - they can move to specialized models that could be smaller, or cheaper. They could even move to open-weight models they can operate themselves.

“Having the ability to move between different models is important, especially as you think about your algorithms. Which models are you going to use? You shouldn't be trapped with a particular kind of model because it has your knowledge,” he concluded.

So, what’s important here is to retain the freedom to switch and move along the way. That also means businesses need to control where their AI workloads run, whether that’s within sovereign infrastructure governed by local regulations, on-prem systems, or public cloud environments (where they can take advantage of greater scalability and cost advantages).

Open source technologies provide the foundation for this flexibility, Waite concluded.

An AI developer has taken on Adobe, the undisputed 800-lbs gorilla of the creative software space. Announcing the 'launch' over on Reddit, the "a 15-year industry veteran" explained that he used Opus 5.5 to help "recreate 7 of the top Adobe apps in 100% pure native Rust".

Adobe's all-consuming subscriptions seems to be the main reason for recreating Photoshop, Premiere Pro, Lightroom, Illustrator, Acrobat Pro, After Effects, and InDesign using the modern programming language.

That's something I can fully appreciate. After all, what if you’re not a fan of their business practices, like charging you a fair chunk of change every month to be able to use their software, and the moment you stop paying, you can no longer work on your files and projects?

So, of course, I just had to check out how it compares to Adobe's own creative suite.

ArtCraft: New apps for the same job

The ArtCraft names are pretty self-explanatory: PhotoCraft is for images, LightCraft for image cataloguing, VectorCraft for vectors, DesignCraft for desktop publishing, FilmCraft for filmmaking, EffectCraft for creating special effects, and PrintCraft is for working with PDFs.

These apps aren't only free, they’re also multi-platform, available for PCs, Macs, and Linux systems, and there are even web-based versions, would you believe it. If you’re curious yourself, you can download them all from the Get ArtCraft website here.

Sound too good to be true? I know what you mean. Plus, is it even legal? I’m not a lawyer, so I haven’t got a clue, but the developer claims it’s all clean code and nothing copyrighted was copied. Make of that what you will (I’m sure I can hear lawyers scurrying through that code like ants at a picnic). But I know what would be a crime: if I didn’t check this software out, and compared it with the original.

I thought I’d look at two packages I use regularly, image editing and filmmaking, and get a feel for how they square up against Photoshop and Premiere Pro. I’ll be using my trusty 16” Intel-based MacBook Pro to check how the software runs on a computer that’s been around the block a few times.

(Image credit: ArtCraft // Future)Installing ArtCraft

Installing the software could hardly be simpler. You select the app you’re after, click on ‘Download’, and run the installer, which in my case simply involved dragging the app’s icon into my Applications folder.

Now first things first, you may be as surprised as I was by the software’s size. On my machine, Adobe Photoshop eats up 6.4GB of storage space. Premiere Pro is a little hungrier, coming in at 6.8GB.

I guess that’s what you should expect for modern software, right? After all, Apple’s Final Cut Pro is 7.7GB, DaVinci Resolve is 9.29GB, Canva Affinity is 3.51GB, and Pixelmator Pro is a svelte 814MB.

But these Craft apps? They’re positively anaemic. PhotoCraft is 80MB, while FilmCraft, 90MB. How can they be so small yet still claim to offer the same features as their… gargantuan counterparts?

PhotoCraft vs Photoshop

(Image credit: ArtCraft // Future)

Let’s highlight the positive first, shall we? You don’t need an account to run PhotoCraft, nor do you need to be online for it to work. Just double-click on the icon and you’re good to go (I’m assuming that’s the case for each of the other 6 apps on offer). You’ll also be pleased to see it kinda looks Photoshop-y.

But it’s not all sunshine and rainbows, and in fact, PhotoCraft failed for me at the very first hurdle: it can’t read the HEIC format.

Now that’s a problem for me as I carry an iPhone, and Apple have used that format by default for all photos taken with such devices since 2017. I guess 9 years is just too short a time to write software that can handle that format.

To be fair to PhotoCraft, many apps and services still have an issue with HEIC… but Photoshop doesn’t.

After having transformed some shots to JPG (necessitating the use of a different image editor - oh the irony), I tried again.

My subsequent experience afterwards was relatively uneventful. I was able to work with various objects, apply colour correction to one or multiple layers, select items, move them around, add a title… all pretty basic stuff, yet admittedly, what Photoshop is most often used for.

(Image credit: ArtCraft // Future)

But it wasn’t a slick experience. For one thing, the software isn’t optimised for Macs - I can’t tell you how much I miss my menu bar at the top of the screen.

More crucially, when trying to select part of an object - especially when using the ellipse tool - the selection wouldn’t hold, and I had to repeat the process multiple times until it did. Moving an object around moved its outline, until I released the mouse button, and then the whole object was shunted to its new location. How very 80s.

And what’s perhaps the most damning thing of all, when I decided to save my project, PhotoCraft saved it… as a JPG. There was no file format option and the only one available destroys any possibility of going back to your project and continuing your work.

If PhotoCraft doesn’t yet have its own file format, why is there no option to save your work as a PSD document instead? Other competitors like Pixelmator Pro let you do that. But not PhotoCraft. That’s, for lack of a better word, bad.

FilmCraft vs Premiere Pro

(Image credit: ArtCraft // Future)

Launching FilmCraft is lightning fast, and I was greeted with a demo project featuring multiple layers, and some transitions. But that won’t help me understand how the software works, so I created a fresh new one and added my own footage.

First off, the interface has a very familiar look to it which is very welcoming. I also definitely appreciated the menu bar being where it’s supposed to be this time. Creating a new project, importing clips, adding them to a new sequence, working with multiple layers, everything was as expected.

(Image credit: ArtCraft // Future)

So far so good, right? Well except that the rest felt a little clunky to be honest. Like I couldn’t manually trim a clip in my sequence. I could use the blade tool for sure, but mousing to the end of the clip and dragging its edge inwards? Sorry, no can do. I’d view that as the absolute most basic action you should be able to perform on a clip.

Aside from that, I could access color correction, apply transitions and other effects… but just like PhotoCraft, it’s crazy slow. I know I purposefully chose an old machine to run this on, but the latest versions of Photoshop and Premiere Pro run rings around these apps on the same hardware.

And then there’s the killing blow: for whatever reason, the audio from the clips I was using were completely unusable. All I got when I tried playing the footage back was static. Very loud static. It’s bound to be a lack of a specific codec again, but frankly, in this day and age, codec support for a vast array of media should be baked in from the start.

Final thoughts

(Image credit: ArtCraft // Future)

Alright. Here’s the good news: these apps look good, feel very familiar, and provide some of the tools that are used most often. It’s impressive what has been achieved, but truth be told, there’s a heck of a lot of overpromising and a huge amount of underdelivering, I’m afraid. These apps are slow, some crucial features are missing, and there are some big bugs that haven’t been dealt with yet.

But part of the reason is these software packages are not even full version releases. PhotoCraft is at 0.20, while FilmCraft’s on 0.2.1. They’re far from ready for prime time. So, I have hopes that they're only going to get better once the time comes.

If you’re looking for free alternatives to the Adobe hegemony, these are not the apps you’re looking for. At least not yet. Let the developer cook a little longer, but if you just can’t wait for your independence, there already are some free alternatives out there I recommend.

Sure, you’ll have to familiarise yourself with new interfaces, but these apps have been delivering the goods for years now and are well worth exploring. I’m thinking of Canva Affinity, and DaVinci Resolve. Personally, I'd check those out until ArtCraft is ready for primetime (and the coast is clear of lawyers).

Read more: The best Adobe Photoshop alternatives and the best Premiere Pro alternatives.

What would you do if you caught a baseball during the MLB playoffs? Give it to a kid nearby or keep it? This very scenario played out this week, with a fan deciding to keep the ball.

(Image credit: Colin Hubbard)

There's a lot of convenience and flexibility that comes with an eSIM, which is why phone manufacturers and consumers are adopting them more and more: they take seconds to set up, you can switch between them quickly, and you don't have to swap over any physical cards (or wait for one to arrive in the post).

eSIMs are typically stored and managed via your phone's operating system, but third-party apps can configure them too. Browser maker Opera has now added eSIM capabilities to its app on Android, and is even throwing in 3GB of free data for the first three days.

It's perfect if you're heading abroad in the near future. eSIMs are even more useful when traveling, as you can connect to local networks with minimal hassle — and thanks to Opera's new offer you'll be able to get online without paying anything or even entering an email address or payment details.

Too good to be true? I gave it a go to find out — but first, the small print.

Here's the deal

Opera for Android now comes with an eSIM (Image credit: Opera)

You can take advantage of this 3GB eSIM deal from Opera if you have a carrier unlocked phone that's eSIM compatible, and that's running Android 10 or later — so the vast majority of current handsets are going to qualify. Opera hasn't suddenly become an eSIM company though: it's partnering with Holiday.com for this.

The 3GB of free data is available if you live in the United States, the United Kingdom, Germany, France, Canada, the United Arab Emirates, Brazil, the Netherlands, Norway, Sweden, or Poland. As mentioned above you won't have to enter any personal details, like an email address or your credit card information, to make use of the 3GB of data, and the allowance kicks in as soon as you're abroad.

Your free 3GB can be used in 47 destinations: Albania, Australia, Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Croatia, Cyprus, the Czech Republic, Denmark, Egypt, Estonia, Finland, France, Georgia, Germany, Greece, Hong Kong, Hungary, Iceland, Ireland, Italy, Latvia, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malaysia, Malta, Montenegro, the Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Singapore, Slovakia, Slovenia, South Korea, Spain, Sri Lanka, Sweden, Switzerland, Taiwan, Thailand, Türkiye, the UK, and the US.

If you then decide to go on and buy an eSIM, you can make your purchase and use it in any location covered by Holiday.com (that's more than 150 countries). Plans are available with 3GB, 5GB, and 10GB of data, and last for 30 days after the first activation. Opera says pricing is typically 33% less than with "other major eSIM providers", though you should of course do some shopping around before buying.

Like most travel eSIMs, this is a data-only deal. The new eSIM won't replace your phone number and will work alongside your current eSIM or physical SIM to get you online in foreign climes — and give you access to the web, WhatsApp, Google Maps, and everything else that works with cellular data. The connection will be via 5G if it's available, otherwise you'll fall back to the next best thing.

Here's how it works

Setup takes just a few minutes (Image credit: Future)

While standard eSIMs are stored in phone memory, when it comes to travel eSIMs that focus on data abroad, you typically have to download and install another app from the eSIM provider. That app then handles all aspects of paying for and installing eSIMs, and getting you connected in whatever country you happen to be in.

Opera takes care of all of this for you, and recommends setting up your eSIM at home on a solid Wi-Fi connection. In the Android app, you need to tap your profile picture (bottom right), then eSIM, then follow the instructions. Tap Claim now, and choose your destination country from the list — your allowance is valid for three days after the first connection abroad, and there's no need to register any of your details.

After choosing your destination, you'll be taken through the eSIM setup process for your device, which will vary depending on your Android phone maker of choice. On a Pixel, it's just a couple of simple taps, and your new Opera 3GB eSIM (powered by Holiday.com) then shows up in Settings > Network and Internet > SIMs.

It's a proper eSIM too, and not just for browsing through Opera: you can use it with Google Chrome, WhatsApp, Instagram, Google Maps, or any app you like. You just need to activate it through your phone's SIMs menu and through the eSIM menu in Opera, and you're up and running once you cross the border.

Sadly, I'm not vacationing in the near future, but I did test out the eSIM in the UK. Speeds were actually faster than on my regular O2 SIM, which must be something to do with mast locations, and I could get online across all my apps without issue.

Your mileage may of course vary depending on country and cell network coverage, but I had no problems with setting up or connecting to my free 3GB data plan.

Scant data about serious adverse effects makes it harder to answer scientific and legal questions about how often the drugs might cause serious harm like blindness or pancreatitis.

(Image credit: The Engel family)

Commentary: While there are ways to recreate some of the iPhone Duo’s style on an Android device, it feels a little desperate to me.

In a blockbuster show, The Metropolitan Museum of Art places the work of two major 20th century artists side by side: the married couple Lee Krasner and Jackson Pollock.

(Image credit: Ernst Haas)

Democrats are hoping to win back Latino voters who have soured on both parties. They hope Latino content creators will bridge the gap.

(Image credit: Matt Rourke)

It has been one year since Hamas released the remaining Israeli hostages and President Trump promised an end to the war, but Palestinians say the past 12 months have been a ceasefire in name only.

(Image credit: Anas Baba)

Carve a pumpkin? You can do better than that. Fun and unusual ways to celebrate the season, from writing a gratitude letter to making an ancestral altar.

Indian authorities have launched a major security crackdown in New Delhi, detaining thousands of protesters who intended to hold a mass demonstration against Prime Minister Narendra Modi's government.

(Image credit: Manish Swarup)

Ugreen NASync DXP8800 Ultra: 30-second review

Ugreen has, out of nowhere, developed an uncanny habit of building the NAS you wanted, then building an even bigger one. The NASync DXP8800 Plus was the flagship of the original range, and the NASync DXP8800 Ultra has now superseded it.

The Ultra is not a redesign. The chassis, the bay count and port layout all carry over. On paper, even the dimensions are identical, at 365 x 258 x 189mm. All that’s new about the Ultra is inside.

That means the same eight SATA bays and two M.2 slots. Filled with 32TB hard drives and 8TB SSDs, it offers up to 272TB in a single box. Dual 10GbE, two Thunderbolt 4 ports, an 8K-capable HDMI output, and a PCIe slot remain unchanged. The revamp includes a newer Intel Core 7 150U processor and raises the memory ceiling from 64GB to a whopping 96GB.

Those are welcome upgrades, but getting these extras over the Plus model is not inexpensive. The asking price for the Ultra is $1,779.99, making it the most expensive model in its DXP range, though less than the iDX series. Hardcore NAS users will want to know one thing. Is the outlay worth the extra over the Plus?

That entirely depends on how you intend to use this NAS. For those who just want file serving, it's probably not worth it. But for someone using virtualisation and hosting AI, it might be an improvement they’ll pay for.

There is also good news on availability. Unlike the Plus at launch, the Ultra needs no Kickstarter campaign. It has been on sale since September 2026.

The operating system is the same UGOS Pro that runs the rest of the range. It has grown since the Plus arrived, though it remains a work in progress.

The DXP8800 Plus was a solid platform and should have been included as one of our best NAS devices, which logically implies that the DXP8800 Ultra might also be a candidate.

(Image credit: Mark Pickavance)Ugreen NASync DXP8800 Ultra: Price and availability

• How much does it cost? $1,779.99/€1.779,99
• When is it out? On sale now in most regions
• Where can you get it? Direct from Ugreen or via online retailers, including Amazon and Newegg

Ugreen sells the Ultra directly and through Amazon, with no crowdfunding shenanigans this time. That is a relief. I have grumbled before about Kickstarter being used as a marketing exercise by numerous companies that hardly need the money, so I’m glad this product came directly to market.

The Plus model launched at an MSRP of $1,499.99, and Kickstarter backers paid as little as $974. It currently sells for $1,207.99, compared to the $ 1,779.99 Ultra direct from Ugreen. That makes the Ultra $570 more, for a machine with the same number of bays and ports.

From the Ugreen site for EU customers, the Ultra is €1.779,99. Which, given the current exchange rate of the US Dollar and Euro, makes it about 11% more expensive, and close to the equivalent of $2000 for Europeans.

At the time of writing, it isn’t stocked in the UK, but I’m told that could change soon.

So what does the extra money get you? A newer processor with a higher clock speed, slightly stronger integrated graphics and room for 96GB of memory instead of 64GB. Almost everything else is shared. That includes the power figures, which Ugreen quotes as 70.39W with the drives active and 28.99W in hibernation for both models.

That memory ceiling needs a reality check. When I reviewed the Plus, a 32GB module cost about $90. In 2026, DDR5 is far more expensive, and a 32GB kit of two 16GB modules is at least $320 even from a lesser-known brand. Filling the Ultra to its limit would cost almost as much as the NAS itself. Therefore, the 96GB ceiling is a promise few owners will rush to experience.

Competition from the usual suspects is weak in this slice of the NAS market. When I looked at the Plus, the Synology DS1823xs+ cost $1,800 for much less processing power and no Thunderbolt. The Ultra costs about the same today, has Thunderbolt 4 and a newer processor, and offers the potential for triple the memory. Synology has largely abandoned the prosumer and small-business sectors, so don’t expect a revised design anytime soon.

Against rivals, the Ultra is still strong value. Against its own siblings, it is much harder to justify.

• Value: 3.5 / 5

(Image credit: Mark Pickavance)Ugreen NASync DXP8800 Ultra: Specs

Item

Spec

CPU:

Intel Core 7 150U (10 cores, 12 threads)

GPU:

Intel integrated graphics (96 EU)

RAM:

8GB DDR5 expandable to 96GB

System Storage:

128GB internal SSD (separate from the M.2 slots)

SATA Storage:

8x 2.5 or 3.5 inch drives (HDD or SSD)

M.2 Storage:

1x M.2 NVMe Gen4 x4, 1x M.2 NVMe Gen3 x2 (up to 8TB each)

RAID:

JBOD, Basic, RAID 0, 1, 5, 6 and 10

Ports:

2x USB 3.2 Gen 2, 2x USB 2.0, 2x Thunderbolt 4, 1x PCIe Gen 4 x4, SD 4.0 card reader

Networking:

2x 10GbE LAN (can be aggregated to 20Gbps)

Outputs:

1x HDMI port, up to 8K resolution

OS:

UGOS Pro

Internal File Systems:

BTRFS, EXT4

External File Systems:

EXT4, NTFS, FAT32, HFS+, ExFAT

Maximum Capacity:

8x 32TB HDD + 2x 8TB M.2 NVMe, plus external storage on USB or Thunderbolt

Power:

70.39W (drive access), 28.99W (drive hibernation)

Dimensions:

365 x 258 x 189 (mm)

Ugreen NASync DXP8800 Ultra: Design

• Unchanged chassis
• Room for 96GB

Since Ugreen first launched the DXP8800 Plus, I’ve been running that platform in my office, and almost nothing is wrong with the form factor or build quality. The DXP8800 Ultra inherits almost everything about the exterior and the drive bays.

The Ultra is built on the same thick aluminium chassis as the Plus, and it measures exactly the same dimensionally. The drive trays, rear dust filter, and dual 120mm fans all appear to carry over. Logically, if it isn’t broken, don't fix it.

On the Plus, I praised the numbered, lockable drive trays and the magnetic fan filter. We regretted that the trays were plastic, and that 2.5-inch drives need screws. But in reality, most people won’t be installing drives every day or using 2.5-inch media. Most people will use 3.5-inch HDDs, and for them the tool-less trays work perfectly well.

Comparing the two machines, the ports also sit where they did before. The front panel carries the power button, drive activity lights, an SD card reader, two Thunderbolt 4 ports and a USB 3.2 Gen 2 port.

Around the back are the PCIe slot, HDMI, a second USB 3.2 Gen 2 port, two USB 2.0 ports and the pair of 10GbE sockets. The card reader is now listed as SD 4.0. In retrospect, I’d have preferred that the Thunderbolt ports were on the back, since I use a Thunderbolt SSD, but that’s a personal choice.

Ugreen is more forthcoming about the PCIe slot this time. It lists it as Gen 4 x4, which matches what I’d always suspected on the Plus. That is plenty for a faster network card or a storage adapter. Fitting one still means removing the case feet and rear panel, so do it before you fill the bays with drives. Or, like me, find out the hard way.

(Image credit: Mark Pickavance)

Underneath, the small service panel hides two M.2 slots and two DDR5 SODIMM sockets. The Ultra ships with a single 8GB module, so one socket is free. A separate 128GB SSD holds the operating system, which isn’t accessible without more disassembly.

That leaves both M.2 slots for your own use. Ugreen lists 96GB as the maximum, which suggests a pair of 48GB modules. For reference, an unbranded 96GB kit (2x48GB modules) is about $1400 on Amazon.

There is still no laptop-style power brick, with the power supply being mounted internally. While this is preferable, because the PSU gets cooled inside the case, it does make a fully populated Ultra a heavy thing that you probably don’t want to move on your own. Before you add drives, it's not too difficult to pick up.

Overall, the Ultra inherits everything that made the Plus a masterclass in NAS hardware making. It is hard to fault, and just as hard to tell apart on the desk.

• Design: 4.5 / 5

Ugreen NASync DXP8800 Ultra: Features

• Intel Core 7 150U CPU
• Up to 96GB of memory
• Gen 4 PCIe slot

The Plus model ran on a Core i5 1235U, whereas the Ultra shifts to the Core 7 150U. Both are ten-core, twelve-thread mobile processors, with two performance cores and eight efficient ones. Core counts have not changed, so do not expect a massive leap in raw muscle.

What does change is the generation and the clock speed. The 150U is a 13th generation Raptor Lake part with a maximum turbo of 5.4GHz and a base frequency of 1.8GHz. The 1235U tops out at 4.4GHz and normally runs at only 1.3 GHz. The integrated graphics also grow, from 80 to 96 execution units. That should help with Quick Sync transcoding for Plex and Jellyfin, although the Plus coped well with Plex in my tests.

How much quicker is it? That depends entirely on the workload, since processing power doesn’t make SATA or the 10GbE LAN ports run any faster. As a computing platform, it’s probably 20% better overall, which might help Virtualisation and AI tasks, but the two chips are close cousins, so the 150U's advantage is more likely to show in lightly threaded jobs.

An annoyance for those who swear by ECC memory is that neither processor supports it. For a NAS aimed at teams and small businesses, that is a shame, and some buyers will not forgive it. The specifications suggest that ODECC (On-Die Error-Correcting Code) is supported, a built-in feature of DDR5 and LPDDR5 memory chips that automatically detects and corrects single-bit errors directly inside the individual RAM ICs. But this won’t be enough for those who like the extra check bits to stored data chunks on ECC RAM.

(Image credit: Mark Pickavance)

Today, non-ECC memory is expensive enough, and ECC RAM is even more expensive, so even if Ugreen had used a platform that supported ECC, many customers might have avoided it because of the high cost.

The Ultra ships with 8GB of DDR5 and supports up to 96GB, compared with a maximum of 64GB for the Plus. To clear up some confusion I've seen online, the RAM supplied in my DXP8800 Ultra was Samsung-branded 5600MHz, whereas the Plus model previously used 4800MHz RAM.

The faster memory offers a slight bandwidth advantage, but it's something to consider if you want to buy another module to pair with the pre-installed SODIMM. This chipset supports 4800MHz modules, so if you swap to a kit of, say, 16GB DDR5 SODIMMs at that speed, it should be fine.

Either way, 96GB is more memory than most NAS owners will ever need. Exceptions include those running ZFS under TrueNAS with a big cache, or those with a stack of virtual machines.

The PCIe slot is listed as Gen 4 x4. Four PCIe 4.0 lanes give a faster network card or storage adapter more than enough bandwidth. That’s enough bandwidth for four 10GbE LAN ports, or a low-profile video card for extra GPU power. The only caveats to installing a discrete video card in this system are that it must physically fit, work with PCIe 4.0, and have no extra PCIe power connectors, meaning it must run entirely off bus (slot) power.

Ugreen kept the rest of the connectivity unchanged, so the new chip supports the same devices as before.

(Image credit: Mark Pickavance)

• Features: 4.5 / 5

Ugreen NASync DXP8800 Ultra: Software

• UGOS Pro
• Docker and virtual machines
• Third-party OS sanctioned

(Image credit: Mark Pickavance)

The Ultra runs UGOS Pro, the same operating system used across the whole NASync range. In an earlier Ugreen review, I called it a work in progress. But it’s evolved since then into a clean, effective NAS environment that relies on Docker to run many critical applications, rather than software compiled specifically for this platform.

The pitch for the Ultra leans heavily on a direct teamwork ethos. It lists centralised management of files, users, permissions and devices, encrypted remote access, a firewall, encryption and backup across several platforms. There is a focus on Docker containers and virtual machines, which is where the Core 7 processing power and the extra memory prove their worth.

Some old complaints deserve a recheck. When I covered the Plus model, I noted that it missed two-factor authentication and WORM volumes that ransomware cannot alter. Also missing in action were the jumbo frames needed to fully exploit 10GbE ports. As UGOS Pro evolved, it has since added two-factor authentication, along with jumbo frames. However, WORM volumes are still missing, sadly.

The lack of Hybrid RAID was another grumble, and it appears to remain. Independent coverage says UGOS Pro still offers no flexible mixed drive mode, so unequal drives waste the difference. It also has no ZFS file system option, only Btrfs and EXT4.

If Ugreen added ZFS or something equivalent, it could hit the WORM drives and hybrid RAID issues over the head simultaneously.

(Image credit: Mark Pickavance)

One area where UGOS Pro leads the pack, rather than following, is the mobile app. It does nearly everything the web interface can, plus a few things it cannot. The Ultra shares the same software, so that strength carries over.

Another strength is that from relatively early on, Ugreen championed third-party operating systems, where other brands refused to accept them. It has said that installing one does not by itself change the hardware warranty, though it will not support problems the software causes, understandably.

But anyone heading down the third-party NAS path needs to be aware that while in the past two years some plugins have been crafted to control the fans and the front panel LEDs for the DXP6800 Plus and DXP8800 Plus, these have not been tested for the Ultra models at this time.

And for those who want to use Unraid, there is a licensing gotcha: the starter $49 option covers only six storage devices. That forces the use of the unlimited license for $109, even on the DXP6800 Plus, if you want to use all the bays and slots.

I’d love to have had the time to install a third-party NAS OS and test out if the Ultra machines will work with the Plus plugins created by the community, but alas, I like to produce more than one review each month.

UGOS Pro remains a work in progress, but it has rapidly become much closer to what TerraMaster and Asustor are fielding from a platform perspective. The Plus and the Ultra share it, so any future gains will benefit both.

(Image credit: Mark Pickavance)

• Software: 3.5 / 5

Ugreen NASync DXP8800 Ultra: Performance

• Faster CPU, same network
• M.2 slots are unchanged
• 10GbE x2 without extra hardware

(Image credit: Mark Pickavance)

On the Plus, testing shows that file serving over both 10GbE ports used less than 15 per cent of the processor, and on the Ultra that’s an even smaller proportion.

But for plain file serving, the Ultra would perform much like the Plus, because the 10GbE LAN port is the limiting factor, not the compute power behind it.

The extra processing power matters when the NAS does more than serve files. Containers, virtual machines, indexing, thumbnail generation and encrypted transfers all lean on the processor and memory. That is where the Ultra pulls ahead.

The network is the real limit. That is a best-case scenario, and a single client still tops out at the speed of one port, which is typically around 980MB/s. Early reviews of the Plus measured 650 to 700MB/s over 10GbE. On my Plus model, I often push 25GB files to it and get a sustained 980MB/s over a single 10GbE link. And, in my testing, the Ultra matched those numbers with four hard drives in a RAID 5 configuration and two SSDs used for caching that volume.

Those wanting faster transfer speeds have a few options, but these are the same ones the Plus hardware can also use. These include connecting to the NAS using the Thunderbolt port in host mode, which can establish a 40Gbps link.

Or you can use SMB to fuse the two 10GbE ports into one, with an appropriate switch. Or you could add a 40GbE LAN card to the PCIe slot, which would again need a switch capable of handling that much bandwidth.

All these things are possible with the Plus model, and remain unchanged in the Ultra.

On the Plus, M.2 slot one ran at full PCIe 4.0 speed, delivering well over 5500MB/s reads from a Gen4 x4 NVMe. Slot two managed less than half that amount, which indicated PCIe 3.0 with two lanes.

I didn’t expect this to change, because the new Core 7 150U processor doesn’t have any more PCIe lanes (20x) than the Core i5 1235U. And, predictably, inside the pocket where the RAM modules and NVMe drives live, the motherboard clearly marks one slot as Gen4 x4 and the other as Gen3 x2. So don’t mix them up, like I stupidly did.

Actually, it’s not a real issue, because UGOS Pro is smart enough to tell the module has moved and reconnect it to the system.

Eight hard drives at around 200MB/s each add up to roughly 1,600MB/s. That is close to what the slower M.2 slot throughput is, and well within reach of a pair of aggregated 10GbE ports. In practice, the drives and the network will limit the Ultra long before the processor does.

Noise deserves a mention, as Ugreen publishes no noise figure for the Ultra. Fully populated and in use, the volume was around 50 dBA, which is quiet enough for it not to be a massive annoyance.

Overall, using the supplied 8GB of RAM as a baseline, it would be hard to differentiate this from the Plus model. Those differences are only likely to surface if you have a particular workflow that involves Virtualisation, lots of Docker containers, or you are running an AI LLM locally. And, in all those situations, you will need more memory, and the 96GB this system can rock can truly come into play.

Ugreen NASync DXP8800 Ultra Final verdict

Where the DXP8800 Plus was a bolt from the blue, the DXP8800 Ultra’s arrival seems more measured. Ugreen kept everything that worked and refreshed the part that aged fastest, that being the processor, and with that change, it increased the memory ceiling.

So is it worth the extra money? For most buyers, sadly it probably isn’t. At today's prices, the Plus still gives you eight bays, two M.2 slots, dual 10GbE, dual Thunderbolt 4 and a PCIe slot for roughly $570 less. File serving, backups, media streaming and a handful of containers run happily on either. The Ultra's extra speed will rarely be the bottleneck unless you use it in specific ways.

That is someone running virtual machines, a large ZFS cache or a busy stack of containers, who will genuinely use more than 64GB of memory. It also suits those who expect to keep the NAS for five to ten years, where any advantage can be gained. For them, the extra headroom is cheap insurance against needing something more powerful in a couple of years.

Just budget for the memory, because DDR5 is not cheap this year. Should the RAM market return to where it was before the AI bubble, then the Ultra instantly becomes a much stronger option. And, as it’s hard to imagine that prices won’t eventually decline over time, making the Ultra a good call for the longer haul.

What’s mildly fascinating is that few alternative NAS units could even match the Plus model. The Synology DX1823xs+, for example, uses the AMD Ryzen V1780B, a four-core CPU, and supports up to 32GB of DDR4 ECC RAM, a single 10GbE LAN port, and eSATA expansion. Similarly, the TerraMaster T9-450 uses an Atom four-core processor, is also limited to 32GB, but at least has dual SFP+ 10GbE ports for close to $1200. But most 8-bay or larger options are pitched exclusively as file servers, while the DXP8800 series are something much more.

Two caveats apply. Neither the older Plus nor the new Ultra supports ECC memory, which will matter more to some businesses than any benchmark. And owners who want TrueNAS or Unraid will find the Plus better supported, at least initially.

If you are buying today, choose the Plus unless you have a clear or future use for 96GB. If street prices close the gap between this NAS and the Plus model to a couple of hundred dollars, the Ultra becomes an easy recommendation. Existing Plus owners should stay put. Nothing here justifies replacing a working NAS, and you could just be sticking your head in a bucket of bees.

If you want to save money on the NAS but don’t mind buying larger-capacity drives, the six-bay DXP6800 Ultra might be a good alternative, as it can also address 96GB of RAM.

Should you buy a Ugreen NASync DXP8800 Ultra?

Value

Expensive when compared to the Plus

3.5 / 5

Design

The design was strong and its almost entirely unchanged

4.5 / 5

Features

8-Bays, Dual 10GbE LAN and Dual Thunderbolt makes for a winning formula

4.5 / 5

Software

Maturing of UGOS Pro, but it still needs WORM and hybrid RAID

3.5 / 5

Performance

Slightly more power than before, and more RAM if you can afford it.

4 / 5

Overall

One of the best NAS just got even better, but cost took its toll

4 / 5

Buy it if...

You have a 5GbE or 10GbE network with dual 10GbE LAN ports, and with SMB Multichannel, you can distribute 20Gbps of data over a network easily. And with a PCIe slot, you can add more LAN bandwidth if you need it.

You need lots of RAM for VT or AI
Being able to scale to 96GB of memory enables this NAS to handle jobs that would break other devices. But, that much DDR5 might cost you almost as much as the NAS.

Don't buy it if...

You are watching the budget
The Plus model isn't cheap, and the Ultra is more than $400 more. If you want to save money, the original Plus is a good choice, or consider six bays and the DXP6800 Ultra instead of the DXP8800 Ultra.

You already have a DXP8800 Plus
Unless you have a very specific problem that the DXP8800 Plus doesn't address, then moving from that to the Ultra would be a largely symbolic gesture. The Ultra adds slightly more processing power and enables an extra 32GB of RAM, and that's about it.

For more NAS solutions we've collated the best NAS hard drives around

It had been a while since Dyson had genuinely surprised us with a product launch, but then the brand unveiled its first toothbrush. Dyson is already a familiar name in personal care, thanks to its now well established hair-styling gadgets, so a move into oral care wasn't entirely left-field. Still, when the CameraJet made its debut, it was still quite the swerve – taking Dyson from the dressing table to the bathroom sink.

The first product has to be radically different... otherwise we wouldn't consider it

Jake Dyson

When I caught up with Jake Dyson — son of founder, James, and Dyson's chief engineer — at the brand's Unveiled event, I wanted to know what prompted such a move. And, more broadly, how a brand might end up with such a twisty, turny product roadmap.

(For clarity, throughout this article I'll be using "Dyson" to mean the brand, and "Jake" to mean the person.)

So, if a toothbrush can become a Dyson gadget, is there anything that couldn't be? "No, it doesn't," Jake declares. "It has to be radically different."

He expands: "The first product has to be radically different, and have performance claims, and a difference against a competitor by a magnitude; otherwise, we wouldn't consider it."

Remember when every hair dryer didn't look like this? (Image credit: Future)

In short, the brand isn't interested in having a go at anything; it wants to make a splash in markets that have grown stagnant. The launch of the first Dyson Supersonic hair dryer in 2016 is a great example — it blew new life into a market that had barely seen change in decades.

And the CameraJet is far from your average toothbrush. It's kitted out with a camera that will stream a live view of the inside of your mouth back to you, and is trained to recognize gaps in your teeth and shoot water/mouthwash at them, to take care of flossing. Whether or not it enjoys the success of the Supersonic remains to be seen, but it certainly checks that "radically different" box.

Striving for perfection

The potential to shake things up is essential, but before a new-category product is launched, other criteria must be met. "It's got to work properly," asserts Jake. "I mean, we probably could have launched [the CameraJet] two years ago, but it wouldn't have hit every gap perfectly, and that's not acceptable."

If we're going to go into a new area, then we'll do that knowing that we've got more products behind it

Jake Dyson

It's unfortunate then that shortly after our conversation, reports of CameraJet faults began rolling in from early adopters. Dyson has blamed this on an isolated production issue that's now under control, so I'll give the company the benefit of the doubt in this instance.

Barring any further hiccups, you should expect more unusual oral care products to also be hitting the market before too long; Jake's third golden rule is that you never launch with just one product. "If we're going to go into a new area, then we'll do that knowing we've got more products behind it," he tells me.

When pushed if he means further iterations, he clarifies the brand aims for "expansion in that category, quite quickly", and confirms it will start with a roadmap of multiple products.

Doubling up

Breaking new markets is an expensive business, but Jake is savvy about not wasting effort. "I think you try not to do things twice that take an awful long time and a lot of investment," he says. "You try to use it again in another product."

He talks about innovations that the brand wants to "platform". A great example is the shrunk-down mechanics and battery system that Dyson developed for its Airwrap, and which also appears in its Supersonic r hair dryer. A version of it is used in the brand's new hot brush, and it also features in the PencilVac and now the PencilMop.

Dyson's shrunk-down mechanics are now used across multiple products (Image credit: Future)

As for exactly how the innovations make their way across team lines, it isn't a defined process. "It happens naturally. You cross-pollinate, you join the dots. 'If we put that with that, we could do this.'," says Jake. "And as a company, we're getting much better at predicting that before we do it."

He explains that this cross-pollination will also sometimes highlight the gaps that Dyson needs to fill. "It makes us realize there are other technologies we need to develop ourselves — which we are, behind the scenes — to enable us to go into those new areas and do something better than anyone else."

What "radically different" products might be on the horizon at Dyson? I'll be watching with interest.

Dyson product tour

Here's a quick rundown of some of Dyson's newest releases — hit the View Details button to read more about each one.

Dyson R1 Nurovi Dry

Read more: The Dyson R1 is my quiet hero of the brand's new robot vacuum range — and its senior design manager explains why it's the "small, effective" option that people who "don't trust" mopping vacs have been crying out for.

Dyson R2 Nurovi Wash+Dry

Read more: "We've ruined many of James' Persian rugs over the years" — Dyson designer shares the development secrets of the brand's new robovac lineup.

Learn about the R3 model (not yet on sale): "It will light up your home like a bowling alley" — Dyson's new Nurovi robot vacuum has a UV light to show up invisible spills, but I'm not sure I'm ready to see what's on my floors.

Dyson CameraJet

Read more: "What you have there is essentially a $70,000 piece of lab equipment in a handheld consumer product": Jake Dyson shares the design secrets of the brand's new mouthwash-squirting toothbrush — and the company explains why some early models had problems.

Review: This game-changing toothbrush offers liquid flossing, precision-brushing, and a camera that doubles as a dental endoscope — I tried it for a week.

Dyson Spot+Scrub Ai Robot Vacuum

Read our full review

Pros

• Good hardware
• Great at little-and-often cleaning
• Excellent self-cleaning
• Smart obstacle avoidance
• Auto vacuuming works well
• Bagless design

Cons

• Some navigation issues
• Unreliable self-empty
• Loud in every mode
• Large vacuum and dock
• Hair wrap on roller
• Transparent bins display dirt

Dyson HushJet Mini Cool Fan

Read more: The Dyson HushJet Mini Cool is the powerful personal fan you won't want to live without this summer — and it's surprisingly reasonably priced, too

Pros

• Powerful concentrated air flow
• Runs for up to 6.5 hours on a single charge
• Stylish, unusual design
• Significantly cheaper than closest competitor

Cons

• Air intake holes are easy to cover with your hand when holding

Dyson Supersonic Travel

Read more: The Dyson Supersonic Travel is proof you don't have to sacrifice hair health on holiday

Pros

• Fast drying for a compact dryer
• Impressively light
• Universal auto-voltage (100–240V)
• Intelligent heat control
• Compatible with Supersonic Nural attachments

Cons

• Reduced airflow versus full-size
• No travel case included
• Only one attachment in the box
• Price sits at the very top end of the travel dryer market

Dyson PencilWash Wet Floor Cleaner

Read our full review

Pros

• Extremely lightweight
• Comfortable and easy to use
• Effective wet and dry cleaning
• Super flexible articulated floorhead
• Compact size is ideal for small homes

Cons

• Costs the same as a good wet/dry floor cleaner
• Doesn't reach right to the edge of baseboards
• Dirty water tank can be messy to empty

Dyson HushJet Purifier Compact

Read our full review

Pros

• Super fast reaction times
• Whisper-quiet
• Covers very large rooms
• Easy-to-use app
• Five-year electrostatic filter life

Cons

• Expensive for purifying only
• Larger than its 'compact' name suggests
• Very limited on-device controls
• No carry handle

Dyson V16 Piston Animal Submarine

Read about the regular version in our review

Dyson PencilVac Fluffycones

Read our full review

Pros

• Ultra-light and extremely compact
• Very nimble and maneuverable
• Soft rollers excellent on hard floor
• Compression maximizes bin capacity
• Lasers illuminate hidden dirt
• Useful screen counts down runtime

Cons

• Not the most powerful suction
• Angled floorhead awkward for edges
• Not suitable for carpet
• Still rather a small bin
• Particles get stuck in bin casing

• Quanta reportedly halted HP notebook production for about a week after price talks stalled
• The dispute centered around ODM-bought parts like PCBs, batteries and power chips, while HP already assumes most memory CPU and GPU costs directly
• Shipments were resumed once HP executives renegotiated a hike

Quanta Computer, the Taiwanese contract manufacturer that builds a large share of HP's laptops, reportedly stopped producing HP notebooks for about a week in September 2026 after the two companies failed to agree on prices.

DigiTimes reports that Quanta cut off supply to press HP into paying more, drawing on a server business that has grown to dwarf its laptop operation.

A fuller account comes from Taiwan People News, which cites supply chain sources saying Quanta co-founder and vice chairman C.C. Leung personally ordered the halt once September negotiations stalled with production resuming only after senior HP executives stepped in with a cost adjustment that Quanta accepted.

AI servers changed the math as buyers continue to pay the price

The story does lack official confirmation, as Quanta told the Taiwan People News that it "does not respond regarding individual customers," and German outlet heise reported that HP has not commented on the issue to date.

Despite this, something that would have been unimaginable only a few years ago, is now entirely plausible, even if one cant find direct evidence for it. The historical improbability has a reason: contract manufacturers rely on scale to spread their fixed costs, and a large order ties up purchasing, capacity and staffing, so even unattractive pricing rarely leads an ODM to switch off a major account.

Heise, which describes HP as Quanta's largest notebook customer, states that HP had refused to share rising production costs and insisted on previously agreed prices, unlike other PC brands, and that HP sent supply chain executives to Taiwan to deal with Leung directly. What it had to give up to get shipments going again has not been make public even as Digitimes states it forced HP to raise prices.

The two companies have some legal history here that seems prudent to highlight: HP won a $438.7 million optical drive price-fixing judgment against Quanta's subsidiary Quanta Storage before settling confidentially in June 2020.

It is important to provide context: most of the more expensive components: GPUs, CPUs and RAM are all sourced directly by HP and it has already pushed price increases back to consumers. The parts Quanta buys on its own account are a different list: printed circuit boards, passive components, lithium batteries, power management chips and Wi-Fi chips, all of which have faced price pressure lately.

When those rise, the cost lands on Quanta unless the contract is reopened or renegotiated, and swapping in cheaper parts brings its own bill for redesign, certification and one-time engineering fees. Quanta seems to be extremely well-fed to want to bother with shouldering additional costs in an industry that is dwarfed by data center servers that make up as much as 80% of its revenue thanks to a surge in AI demand.

There is however a lack of corroborating evidence that this happened: Quanta does not break out shipments by customer, but its totals show no obvious September hole. The company shipped 4.2 million notebooks in September, up 61.5% from August and down 8.7% from a year earlier, according to the same Anue report.

There are reasons a halt might not show up in those totals. Quanta also builds laptops for Apple, including the MacBook Neo, and other customers' volumes could cover an HP gap relatively with ease. Alternatively a one-week production stop also need not become a one-week shipment gap if finished inventory was on hand or output was caught up before the month closed.

Irrespective of whatever happened and whatever was potentially agreed to in Taiwan, the bill flows downstream and consumers are ultimately asked to pay the price. For two decades, PC brands could make their contract manufacturers eat cost increases because those manufacturers had few better places to put their factories.

Quanta now has one if the account holds and other ODMs with fast-growing server businesses will have noticed that a week without HP did not sink Quanta. HP's competitors will have noticed the same too and it might factor into their own negotiations or renegotiations in the future even customers continue pony an increasingly large bill.

Before brandishing Geralt of Rivia's twin blades and braving a "new game" in The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt — Remastered, the main menu invites you to check out the re-release's patch highlights.

Clicking the option opens a top-level list of the title's abundant updates, improvements, and enhancements, from "Upgraded Visuals and Performance" to a "Reimagined Skill System." But while these entries showcase the game's most significant and ambitious inclusions, some of the remaster's best new features are hidden under the catch-all category of "And Much, Much More."

Review info

Platform reviewed: PlayStation 5 Pro
Available on: PlayStation 5 , Xbox Series X|S, Nintendo Switch 2, PC
Release date: September 29, 2026

For example, the fact that the grey-maned monster hunter no longer navigates ladders and waist-high ledges like a toddler sorting out their motor skills might impress seasoned fans more than any fancy new lighting tech. Looting resources while riding Roach – another awesome update that doesn't earn its own bullet point – will similarly delight anyone who previously endured getting on and off Geralt's trusty steed every time they wanted to pick a flower.

While these subtle tweaks aren't as sexy as, say, the stunning visual update, they are welcome, meaningful fixes that not only make the game better, but also reflect CD Projekt Red's larger commitment to deliver more than the bare minimum to make a quick buck.

Much more than a pretty makeover

(Image credit: CD PROJEKT RED)

Of course, while you're effortlessly gathering alchemy ingredients from the saddle, you'll indeed also appreciate the significant graphical leap the game has achieved. The Witcher 3's 2022 next-gen update was already a looker, but the remaster's response to it is a confident, "Hold my beer (or Redanian Lager).

The lighting effects – and resulting shadows – are far more realistic, textures pack noticeably sharper details, and flora-filled environments look as though they've leapt off a postcard. Overall, there's an across-the-board fresh layer of detail and depth that makes the Continent come to life like never before.

If you're tackling the Wild Hunt on a PlayStation 5 Pro, you also have some say in just how striking you want the game to look. A Performance mode uncaps the framerate, guaranteeing the game runs at 60 FPS minimum – but is capable of hitting as high as 90 FPS.

Meanwhile, a dedicated Ray Tracing mode consistently hovers around 60 FPS, while funneling more horsepower into rendering the absolute best lighting effects. Both options more than get the job done, though I preferred the slight visual bump and solid framerate offered by the latter selection.

Combat worthy of a Witcher

(Image credit: CD PROJEKT RED)

It also doesn't hurt that you can now soak in the picturesque sights – such as sunlight realistically filtering through dense foliage – without having to pause every few seconds to reposition Roach. That's right, another "And Much, Much More" addition addresses your mount's previously frustrating collision detection, ensuring the 1,000-plus-pound animal no longer gets caught up on jutting branches and small rocks.

Roach's smoother movements have also apparently rubbed off on Geralt, as the sword-swinging, spell-casting hero not only navigates environmental obstacles with ease, but wields his steel like a proper badass on the battlefield. Previous iterations of The Witcher 3 have been endlessly praised for their graphics, storytelling, quest design, and content-packed open world, but their combat mechanics were typically left out of those acclaim-filled conversations.

Best bit

(Image credit: CD PROJEKT RED)

The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt's combat was always its weakest area, with frequently clunky encounters that didn't quite match the quality of the rest of the game. With battles now feeling much faster, fluid, and dynamic, hacking, slashing, and spell-casting through the ugly hordes is far more immersive, as well as reflective of the rest of the experience's excellence.

That's been remedied in the remaster, as CD Projekt Red has seemingly reworked the clunky combat from the ground up. Where the protagonist's attacks previously felt loose and lacking weight, they now pack a more precise, impactful punch. But not at the cost of speed, as enemy encounters also feel faster, more fluid, and kinetic.

Some factors – from smoother animations and smarter, more reactive enemies to new finishing moves and, crucially, a dynamic camera that no longer struggles to keep up with the lightning-quick action – combine to deliver an experience that now has me eager to breach any bandit camp or monster lair I might stumble upon.

An unbeatable, beast-slaying bundle

(Image credit: CD PROJEKT RED)

CD Projekt Red could have polished the visuals, improved the combat, added a few quality-of-life fixes, and then collected a fat paycheck for their efforts. But they dug deep, considered fan feedback, and made the typical remaster look like a stain on the titular beast-slayer's boots.

Speaking of Geralt's well-trodden footwear, a new style-forward transmog system allows you to wear the armor and wield the weapons you want without sacrificing any attached stats. You'll find further flexibility in the reimagined skill system, which offers newfound freedom for molding your playstyle, experimenting with skills, and generally forging a meaningful character progression path on par with contemporary RPGs.

But these inclusions, too, barely scratch the surface of a lengthy list of improvements that could over-encumber Roach's Beauclair saddlebags. Quest tracking has also been streamlined, looting is less tedious, and meditation is now more immersive and interactive. All that, and a much deeper photo mode ensures you'll spend more time snapping pics than swinging your swords.

Needless to say, The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt Remastered is the absolute best, most definitive version of a game that was already a genre-defining banger when it launched 12 years ago. Toss in the fact that this impressive update also includes the base game's two massive, equally excellent expansions – Hearts of Stone and Blood and Wine – and securing this bundle is a no-brainer for anyone who's yet to conquer the Continent.

Best of all, those who already own any previous version of the award-winning RPG won't pay a single Novigrad Crown for the update, as it's completely free for returning fans.

Should I play The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt — Remastered?Play it if…

You've been waiting for the absolute best version of the game
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt only gets better with each re-release. But I can't imagine another version – at least not one arriving anytime in the near future – besting this bundle. If you've been holding out for the superior, most definitive version of one of the decade's best RPGs, your wait is over.

You're seeking a fresh reason to get behind Geralt's blades
Remastered games have become big business, but most simply offer a more polished graphical presentation. The Witcher 3 is indeed much prettier, but its fresh coat of polygons is just the beginning. Any frustrations you might have encountered the first time around have likely been squashed here, making this a refreshed experience worth revisiting for more than just its shinier visuals. And if you already own the game, you have nothing to lose, as the remaster is a free update.

Don't play it if...

You're expecting new content
As impressive as this remaster is, it does not add any fresh story elements, characters, or other original content. While a new story expansion, dubbed Songs of the Past, is on the way, the remaster solely offers a significantly improved version of the existing campaign and its supplemental content.

Accessibility features

On top of standard settings for adjusting subtitles, interfaces, and HUD elements, The Witcher 3 includes an expansive suite of accessibility options under a new, dedicated section dubbed "Bard's Ballad."

This mode includes several default presets – from unlimited item durability to faster boats – meant to make the game less taxing for those who might experience mental fatigue.

But the mode's nearly 20 toggles can also be tailored to individual needs, so different options, like color-blind-friendly Witcher Senses or fisheye Witcher Senses, can be selected individually based on a particular player's needs and preferences.

How I reviewed The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt — Remastered

I played The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt — Remastered for 30 or so hours. Having already invested dozens upon dozens of hours in more traditional playthroughs of both the original 2015 game and its 2022 next-gen update, I approached the remaster differently, focusing on the many fresh features, updates, and enhancements that separate it from its previous iterations.

I played the game on a PS5 Pro using my budget TCL 4K 65" TV, with HDR enabled. I tested the platform's Performance and Ray Tracing modes, finding the latter offered the preferred experience. For audio, I tested with both my TV's onboard stereo speakers and Sony's PlayStation Pulse Elite headset.

First reviewed October 2026

The prolific horror filmmaker unveiled the trailer for The Exorcist: Martyrs, which he said is “the scariest movie” he’s ever made.